I am confused. "there is only one alternative to not being masculine, which is to be feminine." isn't a double negative since there is only one form of negation in a single clause... I could be wrong though it's early and I'm tired (2 hours of sleep woo)

Masculinity and femininity are not necessarily absolutes, neither are they necessarily antithetical. You can be masculine with strong feminine characteristics (eg Eddie Izzard: built like a rugby player, but looks FAAAABulous in a dress), or feminine with strong masculine characteristics (eg kd lang in her early '90's man's suit phase). You can also be sexless, which is an absence of either characteristic.

If you consider masculine to feminine as a scale with Chuck Norris at one end and Elvira at the other, there's no place to put Eddie Izzard or kd lang on that scale. If on the other hand you consider masculinity and femininity to be orthogonal to each other, you can 'map' more or less any combination of the two factors successfully.

I've just realised this is in Games, Fun and Jokes. This post is none of these. I'll shut up now.

"I don't mean to sound bitter, cynical or cruel; but I am, so that's how it comes out." ~ Bill Hicks."To argue with a person who has renounced reason is like administering medicine to the dead." ~ Thomas Paine."One should not believe everything one reads on the internet." ~ Abraham Lincoln."If you're making a political point wearing a balaclava, you're a c***. It was true for the IRA and it's true now." ~ daftbeaker.

Your Humble Fabulous wrote:I am confused. "there is only one alternative to not being masculine, which is to be feminine." isn't a double negative since there is only one form of negation in a single clause... I could be wrong though it's early and I'm tired (2 hours of sleep woo)

For grammar purposes we ignore Roy's point about masculinity and feminity being perpendicular axes or something and assume that 'not masculine' = 'feminine'. If we then substitute 'not masculine' = 'feminine' into your statement we get "there is only one alternative to being feminine". Since an alternative is a different thing to the one being considered it follows that the alternative to being feminine is being masculine.

Alternative = 1st subject inversion.Not = 2nd subject inversion.

Sorry if this is being overly picky, I've started to become more of a grammar nazi recently and I am trying to stop it before I become Canadian.

That seems to point up a significant difference between Europeans and Americans. A European says: "I can't understand this, what's wrong with me?" An American says: "I can't understand this, what's wrong with him? - Sir Terry Pratchett

The great thing about Beaker is his ability to provoke while still being decorous, or at least within acceptable rules of conduct - Qwertyuiopasd

Part of the point was that (according to the theory) people aren't aware that Western culture treats them as alternatives or even with a continuum. I was purposefully stating that "not masculine" therefore concludes "feminine" in our socialization. If you don't assume that, "not masculine" could very well mean "banana" (which I suppose is a fairly masculine fruit ). I couldn't find any definition of a double negative being an inversion of the subject, merely a negative form (interrogative) used twice in a clause. "Alternative" ain't not no interrogative. On a fun side note, apparently Wikipedia says that Chaucer used multiple negatives in his writing, "he even used a fourfold negative when describing the Knight: "He nevere yet no vileynye ne sayde / In all his lyf unto no maner wight." (i.e., "He never yet no vileness not said / In all his life to no man.")"

Keeping more in line with the topic, I once had an email refer to a penis as "your dude". I wasn't even aware "dude" was interchangeable with "penis".

YHF - Daft isn't trying to argue the gender studies portion of your argument, he's pointing out that your grammar is bad. it's implying that the alternative to being feminine is to be feminine. I think what you meant to say is "the only alternative to being masculine is feminine."

As far as your argument: it is true that penis size is heavily tied into masculinity and self-image (most men who've had penis enlargement surgeries were average-sized before the surgery). Of course, this is silly because masculinity is about the actions you take, not physical attributes. However, your logic is incredibly tortured to come to the conclusion that these ads encourage domestic violence. Just because some men use masculinity as a basis for sexism does not mean that all masculinity is sexist, just as being feminine is not sexist. Furthmore, even if a man does think his masculinity makes him superior to females, that doesn't mean he will be violent against women. So to say that if a man feels inadequate in his masculinity, that automatically means he's sexist, and that automatically means he's violent in his sexism, and that an ad offering masculinity in a pill is therefore promoting violence, is plain silly.

Besides, if masculinity is good and femininity is bad, then women who act masculine would be praised. But they're not; they get called butch, bitches, and are accused of being lesbians. Rather, it'd be more accurate to say that violating gender norms is considered bad.

"How is it that hardly any major religion has looked at science and concluded, 'This is better than we thought! The Universe is much bigger than our prophets said, grander, more subtle, more elegant. God must be even greater than we dreamed'? Instead they say, 'No, no, no! My god is a little god, and I want him to stay that way.'" - Carl Sagan

"To doubt everything or to believe everything are two equally convenient solutions; both dispense with the necessity of reflection." - Henri Poincaré

Not sure, but do not think ^^ is drawing the conclusion that male inadequacy = sexism = violent sexism, but that it 'can' and, therefore, to encourage men to think in terms of the size of their penis = their masculinity is to increase the probability of that outcome. If a guy feels inadequate he would be much better off finding the root of it ( bad farfie, bad farfie) rather than thinking getting a penis enlargement is going to help and if he figures that out he is less likely to act out violently (towards women or in any other way). Happen to think it is a two way street with women who feel inadequate also more likely to resort to sexism and destructive behavior. It is just that culturealy the violent expression is repressed from a very young age so women find other creative ways to express their inadequate frustrations. Please, am not saying everyone that feels inadequate is violent and/or destructive. Many just go meekly into this good night, some with a sign on their back that says 'walk on me'.

Now ^ and ^^, this is 'fun and games' - play nicely or I will have take measures -

~~~~~~/\~~~~~~

The heart has its reason, of which reason knows nothing. -Pascal - thanks, Z

"The only rules that really matter are these: what a man can do and what a man can't do." Cpt Jack Sparrow

"I'm used to going out at 3 in the morning and doing something stupid."Alan Moore

PKMKII wrote:YHF - Daft isn't trying to argue the gender studies portion of your argument, he's pointing out that your grammar is bad. it's implying that the alternative to being feminine is to be feminine. I think what you meant to say is "the only alternative to being masculine is feminine."

What he said.

Also, Chaucer regularly spelled 'c*nt' several different ways including queynte, queinte and Kent (now used as the name of an English county in the south-east)[source=Bill Bryson in 'Mother Tongue'] The man was an excellent story-teller but to follow his grammatical and spelling standards is a silly thing

Just to be clear, I'm not following the argument and not trying to annoy people.

That seems to point up a significant difference between Europeans and Americans. A European says: "I can't understand this, what's wrong with me?" An American says: "I can't understand this, what's wrong with him? - Sir Terry Pratchett

The great thing about Beaker is his ability to provoke while still being decorous, or at least within acceptable rules of conduct - Qwertyuiopasd

farfalla wrote:Not sure, but do not think ^^ is drawing the conclusion that male inadequacy = sexism = violent sexism, but that it 'can' and, therefore, to encourage men to think in terms of the size of their penis = their masculinity is to increase the probability of that outcome.

By that logic, though, any product that's advertised as "increasing masculinity" would be increasing the probability of violent sexism. Are we going to ban truck ads that make owning a truck look manly? No, because the problems are much deeper than that. If a man who beats his wife regular, and has a small penis, suddenly wakes up one morning with a 9-inch penis (or, even for that matter, wakes up one morning and says "my penis is fine the size it is"), I highly doubt he's going to stop beating his wife. The problem of violent sexism has deeper causes, and ranting against enlargement pills is missing the point.

"How is it that hardly any major religion has looked at science and concluded, 'This is better than we thought! The Universe is much bigger than our prophets said, grander, more subtle, more elegant. God must be even greater than we dreamed'? Instead they say, 'No, no, no! My god is a little god, and I want him to stay that way.'" - Carl Sagan

"To doubt everything or to believe everything are two equally convenient solutions; both dispense with the necessity of reflection." - Henri Poincaré

There's an assumption of gender dichotomy in your grammar evaluation though. There does not -have- to be a single alternative to not being masculine. Put another way, if I said "I am not masculine" it DOES NOT necessarily mean "I am feminine", that is just the assumption in our culture. So when I say "there is only one alternative to not being masculine, which is to be feminine," I am referring to the context of our culture, which is what I said I was referring to in the sentences before it. I am referring to how most people think. If I said "there is only one alternative to not being scissors, which is to be rock," would you say that is grammatically incorrect? I wouldn't, I would just say it is factually incorrect, since paper is another alternative (or gun, if you were a cheater like me in elementary school).

To help clarify, there are cultures that have more than two genders. There were many Native American tribes that had a 3rd gender, called Spirit People, which westerners described as strange mix of masculine and feminine characteristics as well as some culturally specific religious leadership roles. Today, some male to female and female to male (m2f, f2m) transgendered individuals believe that they occupy neither masculine nor feminine roles, at least in their more intimate social circles. India had a third gender, Hijras, also religiously oriented. I suppose it would have been clearer to say "people assume there is only one alternative to not being masculine, which is to be feminine."

Roy Hunter is right to say they are not absolutes nor antitheticals in individuals. People do tend to view qualities on a continuum of "masculine - gender neutral - feminine", (there's also a belief that we assume masculine until we recognize feminine signifiers, leaving no gender neutral human characteristic) but individuals can have qualities ranging from one end to the other, such as his example of Eddie Izzard's physique to clothing choice. The problem arises that people generate gender roles, like PMK said, where they assume and pressure people, usually based on their sex, to occupy certain gender characteristics. You can bet Izzard and Lang have been the brunt of jokes and verbal (maybe even physical) attacks because of their violation of the gender roles guidelines

Now, the tl;dr at the end of my quote was kind of intended to be taken less seriously and less a part of the actual argument, but the logic isn't really tortured. Preying off insecurities and feelings of masculine inadequacy promotes the notion of a masculine ideal to which men should adhere. Given the cultured assumption that gender exists in binary and is heavily correlated to sex, it promotes the preexisting separate ideals of men being masculine power seeking, and women being feminine submissive. It is only under the conditions where men are expected to seek power and women are expected to bend to it that domestic violence occurs. There are only four cultures on earth where there is no evidence of domestic violence; one of them is a matriarchy and doesn't quite count, but the other three have the same thing in common. Women share equal power in the three major social realms of economics and business ownership, politics and governance, and religious leadership and practice. Because the relationship of gender does not have men expected to power seek over women, domestic violence does not occur.

Now it's true what PMK says that penis pill ads don't outright promote the violent or sexist aspects of masculinity, but it's the case that violence and sexism aren't why domestic abusers do what they do. Domestic violence is about power and control - domestic violence isn't even always violent, it could be a husband locking his wife outside in the cold all night to "teach her a lesson", or stealing her car keys to keep her at home, or threatening with violence towards her or her children. As long as it's intended to control and overpower, it qualifies as domestic abuse (or at least that's all that's required to get you into a domestic violence relief shelter). Now the real issue is that our culture's gender roles have masculinity as power seeking, femininity submissive, and as a result the casual promotion of gender roles in our culture promotes the power difference of the genders. So the line of thought,

PKMKII wrote:if a man feels inadequate in his masculinity, that automatically means he's sexist, and that automatically means he's violent in his sexism, and that an ad offering masculinity in a pill is therefore promoting violence

isn't really the line of thought in that particular perspective at all. It's more "gender roles in our culture produce a power difference in the genders, so promoting a gender ideal promotes those roles and therefore promotes the power difference, and it is because of that power difference that domestic violence occurs." Penis pill ads promote the idea, or at least an aspect of a generally recognized ideal masculinity, accepting it as real.

Now to keep this is line with "Games, Fun, and Jokes" theme of this section of the forum, here's a link to a bunch of synonyms for penis, all which would be hilarious to see in enlargement ads.http://www.namingschemes.com/Penis_Synonyms

PKMKII wrote:YHF - Daft isn't trying to argue the gender studies portion of your argument, he's pointing out that your grammar is bad. it's implying that the alternative to being feminine is to be feminine.

farfalla wrote:Not sure, but do not think ^^ is drawing the conclusion that male inadequacy = sexism = violent sexism, but that it 'can' and, therefore, to encourage men to think in terms of the size of their penis = their masculinity is to increase the probability of that outcome.

By that logic, though, any product that's advertised as "increasing masculinity" would be increasing the probability of violent sexism.

Sadly, yes, although this is not because the ad is bad and that the ads are the cause, merely they reflect and reinforce (which is what ads do) an edifice in culture, namely gender roles. They don't even reflect the bad parts of the masculine/feminine mindset, but since gender roles exist, the okay parts of masculinity and femininity end up supporting the bad parts in the minds of those who buy into gender roles and believe there is a power difference.

The effort to reduce things like domestic violence and the ridiculous ratio of men to women incarcerated or people getting raped is centered around reducing the notion that gender identity should be power oriented, or that women should be less power seeking and less powerful than men. It's about equal social power for the genders. The penis ads are small potatoes and isn't the main focus of any feminist movement, and wasn't even the highlight of what I originally was talking about, which is why I gave it a small sentence at the end of my post and I intended for it to be rather curt.

Zelinka Standiford wrote:Having sex With oWmen and Other Values Women offer You

I have no idea what this means. I don't think I'll buy one.

"I don't mean to sound bitter, cynical or cruel; but I am, so that's how it comes out." ~ Bill Hicks."To argue with a person who has renounced reason is like administering medicine to the dead." ~ Thomas Paine."One should not believe everything one reads on the internet." ~ Abraham Lincoln."If you're making a political point wearing a balaclava, you're a c***. It was true for the IRA and it's true now." ~ daftbeaker.